Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Paul Butler: on 10/16/12 at 5:32am UTC, wrote Dear Sergey; It is good that you desire for the contest to be fair. My...

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 7:51am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

Paul Butler: on 10/2/12 at 16:28pm UTC, wrote Dear Hector, Teasing can add spice to life, especially if you can find...

Paul Butler: on 10/2/12 at 4:55am UTC, wrote Dear Ioannis, It is good that you desire further communication. I am not...

Vladimir Tamari: on 9/29/12 at 11:22am UTC, wrote Hello. This is group message to you and the writers of some 80 contest ...

Hector Zenil: on 9/25/12 at 6:43am UTC, wrote Paul, I see you like to tease your readers. I wonder if the topic behind...

Ioannis: on 9/20/12 at 11:42am UTC, wrote By no means I desire to have no any more conversation with you. What I mean...

Paul Butler: on 9/20/12 at 5:55am UTC, wrote Dear Ioannis, I have enjoyed our discussion. Your concept of things and...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Robert McEachern: ""all experiments have pointed towards this and there is no way to avoid..." in Review of "Foundations of...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Steve Agnew, Naturally provided VISIBLE realty am not a silly humanly..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

James Putnam: "Light bends because it is accelerating. It accelerates toward an object..." in Black Hole Photographed...

Steve Agnew: "Stringy and loop quantum are the two big contenders, but neither has a..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Robert McEachern: "Lorenzo, The nature of "information" is well understood outside of..." in Review of "Foundations of...

Georgina Woodward: "Steve, Lorraine is writing about a simpler "knowing " rather than the..." in The Nature of Time

Steve Agnew: "Knowing information necessarily means neural action potentials. Atom and..." in The Nature of Time


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.


FQXi FORUM
May 20, 2019

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: Understanding the Structure of the Universe, A Basic Structural Toolkit by Paul N Butler [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Paul N Butler wrote on Aug. 1, 2012 @ 12:58 GMT
Essay Abstract

This paper is designed to give some concepts that can be used to help in the understanding of current observational data, especially in how to connect the dots in areas of that data that are often overlooked or not connected together in common presentations. When these connections are made a whole new world of understanding is opened up that can let the observer go beyond the constraints of Quantum Mechanics to an understanding of what causes the multiple possible results from any given matter particle interaction and why their probabilities of occurrence are as they are.

Author Bio

Has concentrated for a long time in the following areas of study: 1. Dimensional Structuring: Study of the structure of the Dimensional System that contains the entities that exist in it and to a great degree determines their structure and the interactions that they can have with each other and with the Dimensional System. 2. Motion Structuring: Study of the motions of which all entities that exist within the Dimensional System are composed and their part in the structure of the interactions that occur between entities and the interactions that occur between entities and the Dimensional System.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Aug. 2, 2012 @ 03:01 GMT
Dear Paul N Butler

I enjoyed reading your essay. You have ignored fqxi's suggestion to answer this Contest question and not to shoehorn your pet theory, but in this case it is to the good.

As I read your proposals to deconstruct the workings of Nature to its most basic level, I could not help seeing striking similarities with my own pet Beautiful Universe Theory . You propose a physical reason for the probabilistic behavior of particles, which is fully explained in my paper. What you call motion entity might be my lattice nodes transmitting angular momentum (and nothing else) to their neighbors. You describe how energy must be both angular and linear. You correctly described cyclical motion within matter to explain its wavelength. The only point where I tended to seriously disagree with your musings is when you invoked a 5th. dimension to account for matter particle's wave property. That is unnecessary if you think that this wavelength is the manifestation of the internal cyclical motion outside matter, ie the wavelength of its surrounding gravitational field.

Wishing you all the best

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Alan Lowey wrote on Aug. 3, 2012 @ 15:19 GMT
Hi Paul,

I gained something from reading your essay with regard to your openness and humanity. I too have something to offer which you may find new and exciting: Newtons Isotropy and Equivalence Is Simplicity That Has Led to Modern Day Mass Misconceptions of Reality

Best wishes,

Alan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Aug. 4, 2012 @ 04:29 GMT
Dear Valdimir,

I am glad that you enjoyed reading my essay. Although my paper was primarily aimed at giving examples of concepts that can help in the understanding and direct interpretation of observed data in order to encourage a return to science based on real world observations rather than based more and more on math models that are divorced from the way things work in the real world,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



NARSEP wrote on Aug. 4, 2012 @ 06:34 GMT
Dear Paul,

I consider your essay as a try to return to the real physical problems instead of dealing with the uppermost level of natural hierarchy.

However, the ones we are dealing with fundamental concepts we have to be clear about what we are speaking about and so my questions follow in order to get the maximum from your try,

1) when you examine motion you mean motion of what (vacuum, space, spacetime ..)? In case you consider it as a fundamental entity of its own, how can we attribute (detect-examine) its properties (e.g. position)?

2) if the need for a new entity creates a new dimension I am afraid we will exceed the 11 dimensions of string theory; for example what about the charge or the spin?

3) there is no point to doubt about the continuity of motion as my opinion is that the granulation of spacetime manifold is a physical need.

Very good luck,

Ioannis

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Aug. 4, 2012 @ 22:43 GMT
Dear Alan,

I read your paper and you have noticed some things that most others have not, except maybe the exotic matter part. All large masses such as galaxies, stars, and even the earth generate sub-energy fields. As the earth enters the sun’s sub-energy field it experiences the field. As it passes the center of the field, the effects reverse. It is like falling into a hole in a large asteroid. First you experience its pull, then you pass the middle and you suddenly find the force reversed. (Of course, if it is a recreational asteroid and you jump off by the waterfall the view on the way down can be fantastic and then comes the exhilarating feeling as you crash into the shallow pool of water in the middle and come out the other side. That was a Sci-fi moment. At least as far as you know.) This can have various effects within and on such bodies as they pass through such fields. The alignment of planet’s fields can also cause some such effects, as can be seen by some things happening on earth at this time. The change is too low in frequency and magnitude for us to feel it. I hope you find this useful in your studies.

Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Aug. 5, 2012 @ 00:57 GMT
Dear Ioannis,

NARSEP sounds like a government mnemonic for something like National Aeronautics Research Space Exploration Program or some such thing.

You are close. It’s more like, if you don’t start with the real physical problems and decipher them, you will never really understand the uppermost level of natural hierarchy. You may end up with a lot of math that defines field...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


NARSEP replied on Aug. 5, 2012 @ 06:43 GMT
NARSEP : NAtural Responsible and Socially Egalitarian Proposal (far from any government's agency). "Scientist" ought to be a politically active member of the society as well.

Because you declare that :"I am not getting into the nature or composition of the structural point of the motion entity as that gets into dimensional structuring and is beyond the scope of the current information transfer level." and "The nature of space (i.e. discrete or continuous, etc.) is part of dimensional structuring and as such is not part of information that I can go into at present."

there is no point to follow up, as dimensional structuring is THE problem.

love and peace

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Aug. 6, 2012 @ 01:19 GMT
Dear Paul

Thank you for your interesting explanations and questions.

You are concerned with questions of dimension and they are important, but my approach is less philosophically rigorous. We can speculate about how many dimensions Nature really has, but for my theory if the physical interactions to describe it do not need speculation about dimensions, I have tended to shove the problem under the carpet. I am just being pragmatic about my model which is a bit like a 3D abacus but I am not digging deeper into what 'reality' is about. And for me time is not a dimension so there is that aspect. For example the angular momentum in my lattice nodes can be regarded as a fifth dimension. On the other hand the relations between the linear momentum between adjoining nodes can be said to 'create' the three dimensions of space. So which comes first the model or the dimension?

Your questions about how angular momentum translates into linear is to the point. What I call forward momentum is explained in Section 1.4 and Fig. 5 and others of my Beautiful Universe paper.

I do not blame you for not wishing to read the whole thing at once - it does need to be put into a more concise form, particularly because many of the preparatory arguments I put forth can now go under the category of 'preaching to the converted' and seem accepted by many of the people posting on fqxi. There is a summary of my theory in the second half of my last year's essay Is Reality Digital or Analog?

I wish you luck with your physics!

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Aug. 10, 2012 @ 16:46 GMT
Dear Paul N Butler,

I think we may have to redefine a generic wave dynamics in analogy with neutrino oscillation, in that the energy propagation by the angular motion of electrons in photons may be representational by eigen-rotational string like particles.

With best wishes,

Jayakar

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Aug. 22, 2012 @ 22:02 GMT
Dear Ioannis,

Sorry it has taken so long to get back to you. Things came up that prevented me from having the time to do so and I still have limited time at present, so it may take some time to answer Valdimir and Jayakar, but I will try to do so as soon as possible.

That is why I do not much like such shortcut representations of things. They can make it easier for those who must...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Ioannis replied on Aug. 31, 2012 @ 08:29 GMT
Dear Paul,

Thank you for the extent respond to my posts and the time spent for reading my essays sending your helpful remarks.

Due to the many points I noted on your reply, I send you these as an attached file.

Best wishes, Ioannis

attachments: BUTLER.doc

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Aug. 26, 2012 @ 02:47 GMT
Dear Valdimir,

We both agree that time is not a dimension. To me there must be an understanding and explanation of all aspects of observed reality for a theory to be truly valid. This means that if one talks about an electromagnetic field or charge as being a part of reality, an explanation of what that field or charge is composed of in terms of observed entities should be given. One of...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Sep. 3, 2012 @ 15:41 GMT
Dear Jakakar,

Photons do not contain electrons. It is the other way around. When a photon acquires fifth dimensional motion, it causes it to take a three dimensional curved path that encloses back upon itself to create a cyclical three dimensional standing wave structure that is known as a matter particle. The matter particle’s static mass effect is caused by its angular motion...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Sep. 17, 2012 @ 23:20 GMT
Dear Ioannis,

I do see that VCS could not be expressed in the standard Cartesian system. I just do not see the need for it, partly because when one understands all the motions involved in the interaction and their current conditions at the point of interaction, the resulting output outcome of the interaction becomes known with a one hundred percent probability. The only problem that...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Ioannis Hadjidakis replied on Sep. 18, 2012 @ 10:09 GMT
It seems to agree with many of what you are saying but I agree also to all I am saying. However our extended discussion was (I hope) helpful to both of us but it can not be continued through this forum. It necessitates a closer (face to face) exchanging of ideas although I think your inflationary expression combined with my abstract way will result to a half terrain's game.

All wishes, Ioannis

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Sep. 20, 2012 @ 05:55 GMT
Dear Ioannis,

I have enjoyed our discussion. Your concept of things and places that are hidden from man’s current observation ability by his lack of knowledge of their existence and lack of current ability to make the devices necessary for that observation, is an insight that could help you to understand many things concerning fourth and fifth vector structuring technology development,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Ioannis replied on Sep. 20, 2012 @ 11:42 GMT
By no means I desire to have no any more conversation with you. What I mean is that a discussion that would be running fluently in a face to face meeting it will take a long period of time in order to "built" a common "language". By half terrain game I meant the sort of game when a team is much better than the other and the ball is always at the half part of the terrain. I understand your argument about explaining your point in different ways in order to be understood because I very often have faced the uncomfortable situation I have been misunderstood.

wishes, Ioannis

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Member Hector Zenil wrote on Sep. 25, 2012 @ 06:43 GMT
Paul,

I see you like to tease your readers. I wonder if the topic behind your essay is not rather connected with concepts of symmetry breaking. Perhaps what makes most appealing your essay is its mysterious character.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Sep. 29, 2012 @ 11:22 GMT
Hello. This is group message to you and the writers of some 80 contest essays that I have already read, rated and probably commented on.

This year I feel proud that the following old and new online friends have accepted my suggestion that they submit their ideas to this contest. Please feel free to read, comment on and rate these essays (including mine) if you have not already done so, thanks:

Why We Still Don't Have Quantum Nucleodynamics by Norman D. Cook a summary of his Springer book on the subject.

A Challenge to Quantized Absorption by Experiment and Theory by Eric Stanley Reiter Very important experiments based on Planck's loading theory, proving that Einstein's idea that the photon is a particle is wrong.

An Artist's Modest Proposal by Kenneth Snelson The world-famous inventor of Tensegrity applies his ideas of structure to de Broglie's atom.

Notes on Relativity by Edward Hoerdt Questioning how the Michelson-Morely experiment is analyzed in the context of Special Relativity

Vladimir Tamari's essay Fix Physics! Is Physics like a badly-designed building? A humorous illustrate take. Plus: Seven foundational questions suggest a new beginning.

Thank you and good luck.

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Oct. 2, 2012 @ 04:55 GMT
Dear Ioannis,

It is good that you desire further communication. I am not sure how to get a face to face meeting. I don’t get to Greece at this time. Do you get to the United States of America? That is where I do my work here at this time. Yes it is too bad man’s language is so confounded. It makes things so difficult. If one team is much better than the other, wouldn’t the ball...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Author Paul N Butler wrote on Oct. 2, 2012 @ 16:28 GMT
Dear Hector,

Teasing can add spice to life, especially if you can find someone else that knows how to participate in a way that is not negative and can open up thought possibilities that might not otherwise be seen or accepted. I usually try to pass on some valuable information for those who can comprehend it. There are many types of symmetries in the world and many symmetries within each of many of these types. What particular symmetries are you interested in breaking. Men like to break things apart and analyze the pieces. It can often be more useful to start with nothing and build things up instead. After all, that is how the world came into being in the first place. I see from my research that you are interested in mathematics and computer applications of it. You might like path flow structuring concepts. Of course, you also might want to take on the more ambitious task of generating the math to describe a matter particle’s fourth and fifth vector standing wave interrelationships and the interaction relationships between matter particles. There are symmetries involved there. I try to not break them, however, as that could create very messy situations that are hard to clean up. Sadly there are some that like to make messes for their gain to man’s detriment that must be stopped at the appropriate time, but full judgment time must be provided to them. I am sure that you can understand that if man was going from world to world destroying the local populations, so he could take over worlds for himself, you would not want to see man destroyed without first being given the opportunity to change his ways. The Fifth Vector Structural Council does not take the destruction of an entire life structure lightly. Such things will be stopped one way or the other at the proper time, however. There is a Sci-Fi moment for you; at least it looks like one.

Mysteriously,

Paul

Bookmark and Share



Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 07:51 GMT
If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is
and
was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have
of points. After it anyone give you
of points so you have
of points and
is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have
of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be:
or
or
In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points
then the participant`s rating
was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process. I hope the FQXI community will change the rating process.

Sergey Fedosin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Paul N Butler wrote on Oct. 16, 2012 @ 05:32 GMT
Dear Sergey;

It is good that you desire for the contest to be fair. My purpose for entering it is not to win the prize, as I suppose is the goal of most who enter it, however (although it could have value if it brought attention to or encouraged acceptance of the concepts given). My purpose is to transfer information to man, so that in the future, man can continue to exist and to have...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.